svn commit: r186955 - in head/sys: conf netinet

Attila Nagy bra at
Sat Jan 10 10:28:11 PST 2009

Adrian Chadd wrote:
> 2009/1/10 Robert Watson <rwatson at>:
>> I think Julian's analysis, that this is more of an inet option than a
>> socket-layer option, seems more appropriate to me, the benefits of
>> portability in adopting the API used by OpenBSD/BSDI/etc seem more
>> compelling.  We should make sure that, if we move to the socket option used
>> on those systems, we block setting it on non-supporting protocols, or
>> confusion will result.  In particular, Adrian's change only modified IPv4,
>> not IPv6, so until it's implemented on IPv6 it shouldn't be possible to set
>> the option.
> I'm happy to (eventually) also implement the BSDI API once I actually
> spend time looking at what the difference in behaviours are. If we're
> lucky, the only difference is where the socket option hooks in and the
> actual network behaviour is the same.
> (Meanwhile, I think I have to go off and implement this particular
> behaviour in Squid, and see if the OpenBSD support indeed does
> function as advertised.)
BTW, I'm eagerly waiting for somebody to implement this transparency 
into nginx, which can act as a reverse proxy with built-in perl logic. :)
That way FreeBSD could be used as a highly flexible transparent reverse 
HTTP proxy.

Do you know anything else which can do that now with an easy API 
(accessible from high level languages like perl or python)?

More information about the svn-src-head mailing list